"It is a matter not only of customer protection, it’s also a matter of democracy protection."
Ensuring democracy by selectively censoring. I feel safer already.
I better put AI label on every video I make as there is already AI in the supply chain of all the tech I use. All content contains AI now.
Let's talk about AI commissars who will decide which company will survive.
In fact, let's create a few an NGOs to help! NGO will tell commissar what he wants to hear, NGO will get rewarded and allowed to exist!
I doubt EU will survive the next decade or two without major crisis or war tbh.
Edit:
Instead of downvoting, how about you try retorting?
I don't think I'm incorrect here. But maybe I am!
Another step to make users dumb and blindly trusting of their regulators. I don't opose labeling AI content, I opose mandating it and giving users the false confidence that something without label is legit.
Hard to assess what this rule will actually accomplish. Ultimately AI will be involved in all creative processes going forward, so all pieces of media will have at least some basic AI disclaimer. At the same time, the bad actors that the EU is so paranoid about (Russians secretly undermining our democracy and other boogeymen) will obviously not use the label.
But it's another tool in the EU's toolkit to arbitrarily enforce fines on big tech when politically convenient, of course. That's one thing we remain good at.
My biggest problem with this is that this regulation is only aimed at AI. It should be much broader and include any technology that can be used to make 'authentic-looking' content. Why should someone who's good at Photoshop or VFX be allowed to share fake stuff as real, but not someone who's good with AI?
For many years we've been aware that edited models on magazine covers, Instagram and in ads are negatively impacting the well-being of (young) people, but we've never done anything about that. I consider this regulation incredibly hypocritical and full on populist because 'AI BAD!' and nothing else.
Most of the media you see in the near future (if not already) is going to be at least AI assisted. They're going to be overloaded by reports of AI generation not labeled as AI.
I'm also curious, what about AI assisted media? If a company writes a full article, then uses AI to edit it a bit, does that need to be labeled?
This misses the forest for the trees. The important question is digital provenance so you can verify it came from the entity it claims; whether the entity you trust used AI is not the point. Plenty of people were not to be trusted before, only the EU would insist you trust and distrust who they say you should.
Surely a better idea would be to focus on how we can idk, get camera firmware to cryptographically sign photos or somethin, and then have editing software apply a signature on top. Or at least encourage a system where theres a good chain of image provenance for photojournalists
How do you define "trying to make it look authentic"? You make a deepfake of a politician saying a discriminatory joke, and the author will just say "It was obvious this was not intended to be authentic. Anyone could see it's out of character". But the message already influenced millions.
This is going to get very interesting, I could see some erroneously claiming something as AI and demanding that I have an AI label when it's not. I'm not sure how this is even enforceable.
Meta-commentary on this discussion: okay, I know the ‘hacker news’ thing has always been kinda a misnomer, and has gotten moreso. But it’s still kind of shocking to me how little people here value making something, versus pretending to make something. There’s value to actually doing stuff.
The amount of “all artists will use AI to pretend to make stuff, because money” is honestly kinda bizarre, and completely misunderstands the motivations of most artists, writers and makers.
Right? It strikes me that the vast majority of people complaining genuinely don't understand the difference between law and code, content and art or can think of anything beyond what they are facing in day to day work realities.
I believe we’re all struggling with the downstream effects of the attention economy that’s fed by leveraged debt.
Online, the most money being made is by people who get attention. The making is not just secondary, in many cases it’s a calculation. Even genres that I enjoy as a maker for having real tactile value (repair, restoration, rug cleaning, etc) are inherently not profitable unless they are getting paid out by the video platforms.
For artists this has created a wild set of conflicting constraints. Some can do the Patreon model but for those who don’t, they need attention in order to sell art in order to generate enough money to make art. In this world, AI lowering the barrier to entry means that we’re close to (if not already there) “artists” (aka people farming for money) soaking up all the attention and leaving none for the people who make things.
It’s not that all artists will use AI to pretend to make stuff, it’s that all the pieces are there for a world where these money farmers will be the only visible type of artist.
19 comments
[ 11.0 ms ] story [ 76.3 ms ] threadEnsuring democracy by selectively censoring. I feel safer already.
I better put AI label on every video I make as there is already AI in the supply chain of all the tech I use. All content contains AI now.
Let's talk about AI commissars who will decide which company will survive. In fact, let's create a few an NGOs to help! NGO will tell commissar what he wants to hear, NGO will get rewarded and allowed to exist!
I doubt EU will survive the next decade or two without major crisis or war tbh.
Edit: Instead of downvoting, how about you try retorting? I don't think I'm incorrect here. But maybe I am!
Hard to assess what this rule will actually accomplish. Ultimately AI will be involved in all creative processes going forward, so all pieces of media will have at least some basic AI disclaimer. At the same time, the bad actors that the EU is so paranoid about (Russians secretly undermining our democracy and other boogeymen) will obviously not use the label.
But it's another tool in the EU's toolkit to arbitrarily enforce fines on big tech when politically convenient, of course. That's one thing we remain good at.
For many years we've been aware that edited models on magazine covers, Instagram and in ads are negatively impacting the well-being of (young) people, but we've never done anything about that. I consider this regulation incredibly hypocritical and full on populist because 'AI BAD!' and nothing else.
Most of the media you see in the near future (if not already) is going to be at least AI assisted. They're going to be overloaded by reports of AI generation not labeled as AI.
I'm also curious, what about AI assisted media? If a company writes a full article, then uses AI to edit it a bit, does that need to be labeled?
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng
I feel like this should be linked in any discussion of any legal matter
The amount of “all artists will use AI to pretend to make stuff, because money” is honestly kinda bizarre, and completely misunderstands the motivations of most artists, writers and makers.
Online, the most money being made is by people who get attention. The making is not just secondary, in many cases it’s a calculation. Even genres that I enjoy as a maker for having real tactile value (repair, restoration, rug cleaning, etc) are inherently not profitable unless they are getting paid out by the video platforms.
For artists this has created a wild set of conflicting constraints. Some can do the Patreon model but for those who don’t, they need attention in order to sell art in order to generate enough money to make art. In this world, AI lowering the barrier to entry means that we’re close to (if not already there) “artists” (aka people farming for money) soaking up all the attention and leaving none for the people who make things.
It’s not that all artists will use AI to pretend to make stuff, it’s that all the pieces are there for a world where these money farmers will be the only visible type of artist.